Meeting Minutes online 2012-05-16 (was: Re: Meeting tonight?)
will at digitaldev.com
Tue May 22 18:13:47 UTC 2012
I agree, as a user, I should have some sort of say. But I worry about
letting "everyone" have a say as well as everyone has an opinion. And
if we try to satisfy everyone, we will ultimately fail.
What problem are we trying to solve on this thread? What decisions
need to be made that we need to vote or choose on?
ps. I don't think bringing in an Apple analogy is good, because they
aren't exactly a company that solicits user opinions.
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 6:57 AM, Cyber Penguin
<cyberpenguin1979 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 11:04 PM, Mario Behling <mb at mariobehling.de> wrote:
>> * Calling for and casting votes of groups that do not involve a number
>> of core contributors to the actual system or to lubuntu components can
>> only be regarded as - what it is - an opinion of some users in the
>> community. The outcome cannot be regarded as a decision for the
> That was not a pleasant message to read. I hoped the "no code, no
> vote"-opinion was a thing of the past.
> Lubuntu is an operating system from nerds to nerds, and that's a problem -
> I'm a nerd myself, by the way.
> If Lubuntu is going to get just a slight marketshare we have to abandon this
> way of thinking. The first step is to take people's opinions seriously -
> "people" meaning everyone who gets in touch with the system. We should not
> only pay respect to their vote, but actively seek their opinion.
> Some people here need to ask themselves: Why is Apple such a succes? For the
> most part it comes from a no-compromise focus on the end-user and his needs
> and wishes. Imagine going to a board meeting at Apple suggesting that only
> "contributors" have a word to say...
> Keeping a Lubuntu oligarchy is counterproductive, it creates dissatisfaction
> and scares new people away from doing an effort. Let's take an example,
> which is entirely made up. Any resemblance to real characters is a
> A new web site is proposed in a process where everybody can not only post
> their opinions, they are encouraged to do so. After development the site is
> put to a vote where a vast majority supports the change.
> An extended period of radio silence goes by, and some day a new site is
> going live having nothing in common with the site people voted for. In stead
> the official Lubuntu domain is used to promote a personal desire of
> Remembering this is only fiction, how would we expect the community to
> receive the change?
> a) I'm sorry I cast the wrong vote. Thanks for knowing what was best for
> b) This is not the way I want to cooperate - followed by intense discussions
> on the mailing list about concentration of power and leading to key people
> stepping down from their posts.
> Of course there can be exceptions where a coder has a certain specialist
> knowledge in his field, but what we see is a small number of coders feeling
> the right to make decisions far away from their area of expertise.
> I was hoping the recent turbulence had convinced everyone that the 'some
> animals are more equal than others'-approach must go, but apparently there
> is still some trace left. When forming new guidelines for the community I
> hope everybody will take part in putting it to sleep for good.
> Lubuntu-users mailing list
> Lubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
More information about the Lubuntu-users